At the same time, I think there needs to be a more effective movement to combat the injustices against males in society. I dislike the term of "The Men's Movement" because it has a somewhat primitive connotation and it may be a bit misleading. I prefer the term "masculinism" as a compliment to rational-thinking feminism. This is the movement I have sought to spread, and you can read more about it at my website, "Dude Power!" (the male equivalent of "Girl Power!")

http://www.geocities.com/WestHollywood/Castro/3242

Meanwhile, while we as masculinists fight for the rights of males which are so often overlooked in various facets of modern society, we must also be sure to combat "Masculinazism". The Masculinazis are males who wish to control the world by keeping women in subserviant positions. Both Masculinazis and Feminazis must be contained in society if we can ever to expect to function cooperatively as males and females.

There are also misguided males and females who I would consider "borderline Masculinazis/Feminazis". While these individuals are not outright extremists, they do exhibit noticeable sexism and prejudice toward the opposite sex (or even toward their own sex). People such as these must have concepts of TRUE masculinism/feminsim instilled in them by, respectively, their rational-thinking brothers/sisters.

I know it may seem presumptuous to you that I am assigning all of these "titles", but I find it an effective way to categorize contemporary attitudes in both females and males. It is also a necessity since the definition of feminism per se has become so skewed and sketchy over the past few decades, and we must restore integrity to TRUE feminism as well as promote TRUE masculinism.

Also, I want to say that I as a gay male am quite offended by the (archived) comments I've read which have been made by some of your visitors who so ignorantly stated, "men need women more than women need men." I hate to burst their bubble, but not all males have the exact same personal needs, nor do all females. For this reason, I find such generalizations both ignorant and distasteful.

I can tell you from MY OWN perspective that I personally find myself to be more drawn to and in need of male companionship (even if it's only in the platonic sense). I don't limit myself by excluding all females for potential platonic friendships; but my point is that from a male perspective I can safely say that women as a category are NOT a priority in my own life. I'm sure other males can say the same, and I'm sure many females can say likewise in reference to males. So that person who said "men need women more than women need men" is just kidding herself!

Yes, we all need companionship, but it isn't always gender-specific, and I find myself quite independent from the myth of "male dependence on women", thank you very much.

However the case that you mention of the woman that died also leaves some questions. Was she genuinely less qualified than male pilots. You provide no actual evidence to support the claim though I am sympathetic to the possibility. However ultimately, what position do you want to take about female participation in the military? While women may generally be weaker than men and be relatively unsuited to hand-to-hand combat, they would seem to be, in the long run, quite suited to being pilots and operating machinery of mass destruction or performing engineering tasks. However I agree that the fanatical devotion to obtaining symbolic results has put women into positions, at times, for which they were not sufficiently competent. Victims of the war.